Chas

I like to post the jazz orgy listings here with plenty of advance notice , but it slipped my mind this time . The good news is that only one jazz orgy has already aired - the Max Roach orgy last Monday . The only other jazz orgy is coming up this Monday and it's one focusing on something of particular interest to me : The Third Stream . Edit : Seems I overlooked the Bass Clarinet in Jazz orgy next Wednesday .

But, unless you have asked most men and women and you are absolutely sure that they are being candid, you can only speak for yourself. Unless I missed something , everyone here is 'only' speaking for themselves . I suspect your pique has little to do with the fact that I failed to affix IMO to my post . I see your comment as disingenuous , for you must surely be familiar with the science of sampling and the fact that one needn't ask most people in order to make inferences about them , hence you must know that strictly speaking , your statement is false . In addition , my view presumes nothing about people's candor , since as my response to Bill outlined , it is predicated on a collection of my own and others' observations and reasonable inferences therefrom . Pique??? Not at all. I just questioned your broad, general statement. So, you are saying that you formed your opinion using "sampling??? As a result of this extensive research, asking your friends what they think, or merely observing them, you have concluded that most men cuddle because it seems to increase their chances of moving toward something more "valued" and most women pretend to like jazz in order to make themselves more attractive to targetted men?? Just how large is your research sampling group/circle of friends? What about men who pretend to like jazz in order to impress women, like me and the women who post here who genuinely love jazz?? Are they an anomaly? What about men who actually like to be cuddled and aren't doing it, or in your mileu apparently, are enduring it for the benefit of their women simply in order to move toward something more "valued"? Are they also an anomaly? And yes, you should have prefaced or qualified your statement in a way that made it clear that it was your understanding as being the general opinion of you and your friends. It's a really big world. IN MY OPINION , your comments suggest that you're the type who feels their political egalitarianism and commitment to gender equity necessitate a jaundiced and prejudicial view of any putative gender differences , the type who feels that there can be no comparisons between men and women that are not invidious or politically motivated , that you are in short , an ideologue , and can be dismissed as such . If ever a thread needed a dose of DEEP's brand of ribaldry it's this one !

But, unless you have asked most men and women and you are absolutely sure that they are being candid, you can only speak for yourself. Unless I missed something , everyone here is 'only' speaking for themselves . I suspect your pique has little to do with the fact that I failed to affix IMO to my post . I see your comment as disingenuous , for you must surely be familiar with the science of sampling and the fact that one needn't ask most people in order to make inferences about them , hence you must know that strictly speaking , your statement is false . In addition , my view presumes nothing about people's candor , since as my response to Bill outlined , it is predicated on a collection of my own and others' observations and reasonable inferences therefrom .

I'm skeptical of this Bill . I mean , how can you look over a crowd and tell who's with whom ? If women's attendance reflects a true interest then wouldn't you expect to see an equal number of women in the jazz sections of music stores , or women with bigger jazz collections than your own , or a lot more women posting on the various jazz bulletin boards or writing for jazz publications ? Egalitarian fantasies notwithstanding , most women view jazz the way men view cuddling : as an adjunct or instrumentality to something more 'valued' .

If I remember correctly Hasaan Ibn Ali , born William Henry Langford , died in 1981 at age 50 . I don't play his lp much ; guess I'd rather listen to Monk , Nichols or Hope . Tom Dowd's engineering didn't do anyone any favors either . I recall though that Max's playing is top notch , so that's as good a reason as any to dig this one out and revisit it . Anyway , here's an earlier thread discussing both Hasaan's date with Max , and Hasaan's unissued date with Odean Pope : http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=7007

I also love the Credit Crunch Cereal pic. Is it a coincidence that the guy in that pic looks (to me, anyway) like the guy at the head of the Economist article? Is this Bernanke? Yes that is the great and powerful Oz er, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke .

I couldn't disagree more . The Fed is taking their customary hair-of-the-dog approach : an economy drunk on cheap money needs...........more cheap money ! The Fed's move was acknowledgment , if any was needed , that the U.S. economy and the consumption which drives it , are now structurally dependent on unbounded credit expansion and concomitantly rising asset values. In such a debt-saturated society inflation is tacitly welcomed while deflation is openly fought . Given that the business cycle is a function of an unchanging human nature , attempts to abolish it are misguided , and what's more , are downright dangerous . Forest rangers know that if occasional small fires are always extinguished , the risk of a forest-destroying conflagration grow enormously . Likewise , small tremors relieve some of the pressures that cause devastating earthquakes . The economy is like this too . The Fed is in effect trading the current economic pain of the few for the future economic pain of the many . That the Wall Street tail now wags the economic dog is reason aplenty for gloom .

Each of us is just one uncleaned eaves trough away from something like this : 'Course , if instead that's Cthulhu about to devour six souls , then we've got bigger problems

Pretty interesting stuff, particularly how fast plants take over buildings. Geez , you guys sound like you've never seen kudzu in action

Haven't heard the latest CD reissue of this one , but reports are that the sound quality leaves something to be desired : http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22777 Lots more recommendations in this thread : http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=8888

I'll take that as a yes. Nah , Evan's not interested ; he's just referencing this old board "controversy" : http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=16719&

What's the personnel for this album? I can't seem to find any info on it. Red Norvo Sextet : Harry Edison (tp) Ben Webster (ts) Red Norvo (vib,xyl) Jimmy Rowles (p) Bob Carter (b) Bill Douglass (d) Los Angeles, January 18, 1957 Red Norvo and his Orchestra : Don Fagerquist, Ed Leddy, Ray Linn, Don Paladino (tp) Ray Sims (tb) Willie Smith (as) Harold Land (ts) Chuck Gentry (bar) Red Norvo (vib) Jimmy Rowles (p) Jimmy Wyble (g) Red Wooten (b) Mel Lewis (d) Helen Humes (vcl) Los Angeles, January 28, 1958

As do I . The only track on Brock's Tops that I would call 'functional' is the blues number , where Brock seems less comfortable , perhaps even a little stiff . On the rest he swings adroitly , and with particular grace on Sweet and Lovely . Unlike the Downbeat reviewer , I don't find his treatment of ballads florid ; on these his pacing and use of space are commendable . Rhythm support is fine throughout , especially Hanson on brushes . If this was recorded live at the Onyx Club in Miami as the liner notes state , it must have been after-hours . The only Brock recording currently available is the live trio date he did in '57 for Miami-based Criteria , available as a V.S.O.P. CD . That CD cover reuses the photo from the Brock's Tops cover , whereas the Japanese Norma CD of the same session has the original cover : Additional Brock sessions include this live solo one done in '66 for Miami-based Art Records: And one not in the discographies , a trio date ( with a vocalist on two tracks ) done in 1963 and issued on a ten-inch lp on his own label , and available in a Norma facsimile : And here's what that first Brock Savoy looks like :

To what end? No minds will be changed, and stereotypes will just be reinforced all round. Hardly seems like a productive use of resources. I will say, however, that there is/has/will probably be enough (and even a little is enough, really) of musical interest in various types of pop to merit keeping an ear open when something good comes along. Funny your use of the phrase , "productive use of resources" , for this takes us to the heart of the matter . I agree with you that pop music , as is true of all styles of music , can on occasion be musically interesting or aesthetically rewarding . It just seems to me that the opportunity costs of exploring it are too high given the constraints on our time and resources , and given that the extra-aesthetic functions of pop music work against aesthetic experience to a far greater extent than in jazz and classical music . Being open to something , and actively seeking something are two different things ; the latter involves trade-offs , recognized or not . If life presents me with musically interesting pop music experiences , I'll enjoy them and count myself lucky , but those experiences won't ever make me irrationally dedicate limited resources to a music far less likely to produce such experiences . I suppose those who think "dancing=idiocy" as you put it , might cynically see your comments about musically interesting pop music as just the cover story of a guy who really just wants to dance . Instead I'm inclined to take your claims at face value , which leads me to this . Your active seeking of aesthetic experiences in current pop music suggests to me both that you feel that you've had all the aesthetic experiences there are to be had in the jazz and classical worlds , and that pop music can achieve a type of musical significance or interest not to be found even in something as diverse and historically deep as jazz and classical music . With respect to the former , well all I can say is that that will never be true for me . As to the latter , what can I say except that I myself haven't found that to be true .

Substitute "free jazz" for "smooth jazz" and I'm with you.....

Incorrect comma placement , today your sentence illustrates .

It would be a great art music indeed that could express the range and nuances of human emotions embodied in the popular musics of the world. I don't see any reason to think that art musics can't equal the expressive range of the vernacular forms on which they are based . Insofar as art music abstracts from the language-bound narrativity of many vernacular forms , and insofar as emotions are ineffable , it would seem art music is better suited than popular music to the expression of the full range and nuance of emotional life . This is especially true if the popular music in question is the 'pop music' of mass-consumer culture wherein extra-aesthetic functions , themselves a function of the economic system , come at the expense of the music's expressive function .

um im pretty sure the JJ wasnt released on 78 but on 10 inch.... According to this site two of the tracks from The Eminent J.J. Johnson Vol. 1 were issued on a 10-inch 78 .

Geez, what about just having a simple song in your heart because you really are happy? Oh wait, I guess there are plenty of people who don't have use for that. Anything that simple can't be real, can it. Life is nothing if not a series of psychologically motivated "events". Never mind. The fact that I wrote , "among these functions..." , should tell you that I didn't intend my list to be exhaustive . In the most general sense , emotional expression is obviously a universal musical function . With that in mind , one might ask whether or to what extent pop music is capable of expressing the full range and nuance of emotional life . Can this full range and nuance be expressed through the simple musical structures of pop music or can it only find expression in more complicated 'art' musics ?

I think of it this way : When someone says , " Today's pop music is awful " , they should be understood not as asserting that aesthetic appreciation is the sole function of music , but rather as asserting that pop music has other functions which they don't value as highly or at all . Among these functions are the promotion of group identification , facilitation of courtship , expression of aggression or anxiety and the enablement of the release of physical tension through dancing . In this way , older people who say they have no use for pop music mean it literally .

Guys , the thread started with a solicitation for recommendations of things available at the iTunes store .

What do I think ? I think Art Bell's discovered Youtube . Illucidity's the ticket for those who don't find real drugs anodyne enough for contemporary life .

All the critical plaudits and effusive praise for this album have me truly nonplussed . What's the appeal here ? This is bloodless , unswinging , rhythmically inert music that veers between bombast and preciousness , its new age melodic banality underscored by unctuous solos . That said , my overall reaction is more one of apathy than antipathy . I reserve the latter for those would-be musical ecumenists , who in an attempt to advertise their own hipness , endorse the doublethink that jazz must become non-jazz in order to survive , thereby ensuring that jazz survives as nothing more than a vacuous marketing term .

You can order directly from the Futura website . Online payments are Paypal only .

The Reece , truth be told , I'm interested in for John Gilmore's contribution as much as anything . I'm anticipating a looser more adventurous album than any of the Reece Blue Notes . I know the solo Byard is going to be captivating - just hope he had a good piano . You sound a little less enamored of the Waldrons . The only Waldron I have from that period is the ECM Free At Last which I don't listen to as often as his earlier records . Of the titles you've recommended I'm only familiar with the Hal Singer . That one doesn't do much for me . Singer plays with a lighter tone and less gruffness than his earlier rough and tumble approach which I prefer . Siegfried Kessler sounds like Roger Kellaway at times , not a particularly good fit for Singer . Best track for me is the waltz-ballad featuring Kessler's flute work . As to the other recommendations , could you say a couple of words about each to give me some musical reference points .